Hill v. Miller

Full title: Glenn M. Hill v. Arnold Miller, Sheriff of Arapahoe County

Court: Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc

Date published: May 15, 1978

578 P.2d 655 (Colo. 1978)

578 P.2d 655

Opinion

No. 27909

Decided May 15, 1978. Rehearing Denied June 5, 1978.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus in which appellant challenges the sufficiency of extradition documents submitted by the State of Oklahoma to the Governor of the State of Colorado pursuant to section 16-19-104, C.R.S. 1973. Trial court denied the petition.

Affirmed

1. EXTRADITION — Affidavits — Before or After — Immaterial — Probable Cause — Habeas Corpus — Denial — Proper. Whether the affidavits establishing probable cause were executed before or after the charging document is immaterial, provided that the extradition documents, viewed in their entirety, establish probable cause that the person to be extradited committed the offense; thus, since the documents in instant case fulfilled this standard, appellant's petition for writ of habeas corpus was properly denied.

Appeal from the District Court of Arapahoe County, Honorable William B. Naugle, Judge.

John A. Purvis, State Public Defender, Craig L. Truman, Chief Deputy, Karl M. Gustafson, Deputy, for petitioner-appellant.

J. D. MacFarlane, Attorney General, David W. Robbins, Deputy, Edward G. Donovan, Solicitor General, Anthony Marquez, Assistant, for respondent-appellee.

MR. JUSTICE KELLEY delivered the opinion of the Court.

This appeal concerns the sufficiency of extradition documents submitted by the State of Oklahoma to the Governor of the State of Colorado pursuant to section 16-19-104, C.R.S. 1973. At the hearing upon appellant Hill's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, he contended that the extradition documents were insufficient because the warrant issued on October 27, 1976, did not contain a contemporaneous affidavit establishing probable cause for the issuance of that warrant. Such an affidavit was filed on August 1, 1977. The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, ruling that the extradition documents viewed as a whole substantially complied with the statute. We affirm.

[1] In Wood v. Leach, 189 Colo. 361, 540 P.2d 1084 (1975), we held that "whether the affidavits establishing probable cause were executed before or after the charging document is immaterial, provided that the extradition documents, viewed in their entirety, establish probable cause that the person to be extradited committed the offense." (citations omitted).

The documents in the instant case fulfilled this standard.

Accordingly, we affirm.